Climate Change HOAX Exposed by Geologist to the UK Government

In this video, Geologist Ian Plimer dispels the science behind the Man made Global Warming conspiracy.

Talking at the Houses of Parliament in the U.K, Ian Plimer explains that the world has always experienced climate change and on a number of occasions it has actually affected the world a lot quicker than we are currently experiencing, even though Man was not an inhabitant of the Earth at the time. Sea levels rose by 1500 metres at times and not the few millimetres the scientists are telling us will have a devastating effect on countries.

He explains that the current rate of CO2 in the atmosphere is at an all time low and to further reduce CO2, could have a devastating effect on terrestrial plant life, after all it is the food of plants.

Near the end of the video he mentions the taxes that Governments are introducing and the amount of legislation that has been passed by his own Australian Government, all in the name of reducing the planet from warming by a further 0.7 Celsius.

Yeah, we're being conned.

Hali - freeking - luila.

Finally, a geologist who has knowledge of world-wide evidence that proves that the sea has risen and sunk countless times in the past even before mankind invented fire.

a reply to: Cobaltic1978

First off, it's Plimer, not Pilmer.

Secondly, he's a Mining Geologist, he's nothing near the calibre of geological science we should be listening to on issues of global warming and the study of that data.

Thirdly, he's refused to confront criticism and several accusations of misrepresenting data.

Here's the thing, the guy is making a hell of a lot of money out of being a climate change skeptic, while refusing to confront valid questions over his analysis of data. When you compare the information he claims proves his points to the ACTUAL data available to all scientists and geologists all around the world, it's absolutely clear that he's cherry-picking the data he likes, the things which support his notions and claims, while rejecting and ignoring anything he can't weave into his "conspiracy".

I have actually gone back and forth on this issue before, I believed people like him once, until I actually looked at the data, looked at the information these propagandists were presenting, seeing that it was wholly inaccurate and carefully selected to support their money-making books and videos, and I made the rational choice to believe a thousand actual Geologists and Climate scientists over the random liar wanting to cash in by presenting junk science as valid.

I would recommend that anyone here who actually has a scientific and rational mind when it comes to this do a little Googling and find out more about these individuals before you believe their latest YouTube nonsense or the claims in their latest book. You'll soon find that their "science" falls far below acceptable standards and the so called "evidence" they offer for their beliefs have been repeatedly debunked by hundreds of minds far brighter than theirs.

This man is really no different to the anti-Vaccination propagandists, they're all preying on the weak-minded and easily duped to make a lot of money for themselves, and they get away with it because people are lazy and would rather watch a YouTube video telling them what they want to hear than consider any actual science for themselves.

I have been looking at the evidence. This guy does not provide any evidence, his speach is nothing but belief. Sure there have been periods of high C02 levels in the atmosphere before which resulted in extreme weather, but we do not need to be creating this situation either. Back long ago the few people could just move to other areas to get away from it. We have way too many people now, the weather tears apart our homes.

We need to quit buying products that we do not really need, we need to be producing products locally for our communities. We need to quit dumping concentrated chemistry or unnatural chemistry into our environment or it will come back on our grandchildren and make their lives miserable.

We do not need to be traveling so much, even putting the factories and businesses far away from our homes is ridiculous. We are effecting the environment way too much.

This doesn't mean we need to be paying more taxes though, in fact conservation is actually cheaper if done right. We need to create more small businesses locally, not ship things all around the world. This creates jobs too, not just service jobs selling what China makes.

a reply to: Cobaltic1978

Of course we are being conned lol. As soon as you mix new taxes and goverment is going to help it's the recipe for an instant lie. Politicians and climate change are like Betty crocker cakes, nice and sleezy, IMHO. Cheer up though, the worst is yet to come.

I bought a big screen TV here in canadakastan and I am still wondering how that extra $100.00 plus tax for disposal is going to be spent. My new TV seems to have a tax for climate change without representation.

Cheers - Dave

The guy is a director of Rinehart's Roy Hill Holdings and Queensland Coal Investments. He has a fortune of reasons to lie about c02.

a reply to: Rocker2013

Thanks for the correction of the name, I shall rectify once I have finished this reply.

So, are you telling me we should take the data produced by Government funded scientists as given and anybody who refutes it should be given no credence?

originally posted by: Grimpachi
The guy is a director of Rinehart's Roy Hill Holdings and Queensland Coal Investments. He has a fortune of reasons to lie about c02.

That's really all that needs to be said.

That and the fact he thinks that Co2 levels are at all time Lows...kinda hilarious.

ETA: I don't believe in 100% made made global warming either though. Factor, not cause IMO.

~Tenth

a reply to: Cobaltic1978

Well it was obvious that governments would piggyback on the scare mongering as an excuse to levy more taxes, nobody really thinks that paying more money for things is going to stop the climate changing do they ?

As for the causes of climate change, I have no idea the impact we have on the climate but it must be a contribution to an extent regardless of the climate ever changing. There's one thing we can all agree on though and that is the climate IS changing, it's still up for debate though just how much impact we have on it

originally posted by: rickymouse
Sure there have been periods of high C02 levels in the atmosphere before which resulted in extreme weather, but we do not need to be creating this situation either.

Proper scientists and geologists are well aware that such events are more complex than he wants to pretend, such as during periods of increased volcanic activity, periods of drought over large areas... all of these things play off one another, and that is what REAL scientists explore to come up with their theories and explanations of our planets history.

This man ignores all the intricacies of global science and geology specifically to present a biased and simplistic presentation to support his beliefs - in order to make money.

Example: The last eruption of a caldera would have cased global implications when it comes to temperature, weather, plant life, animal life... Proper scientists take this into account in their understanding of global events. This guy would completely ignore the fact that a caldera would have caused that and instead say "Look! We weren't responsible for this and it happened!"

The guy is a moron, being followed by morons.

Regardless what this guy's credentials are, when any government begins massive fearmongering about the climate like the bafoon Al Gore began, and we start seeing all kinds of legislation rammed through to the tune of taxes galore, and taxes on air, then that should always be a red flag that you are being taken for a fool.

originally posted by: Cobaltic1978
a reply to: Rocker2013

Thanks for the correction of the name, I shall rectify once I have finished this reply.

So, are you telling me we should take the data produced by Government funded scientists as given and anybody who refutes it should be given no credence?

No, I'm saying that a logical person would trust the opinions of thousands of scientists and geologists all over the world, people who have dedicated their lives to this science, and whom all seem to agree, over the opinions of a half-wit who is making millions through the misrepresentation of data that anyone can see for themselves.

Paranoia and distrust should not be guiding your decisions in spite of actual scientific data.

I don't trust governments generally, as a rule, but I'm not stupid enough to reject all science because of that distrust and believe something proven to be incorrect.

Imagine this scenario... a Nuclear accident occurs and the government tells you to keep away from an area. Then a random eye doctor comes along and tells you they're lying, that you should go and take a walk in the affected area.
Would you allow your paranoid distrust of your government to lead you to believe him?

a reply to: tothetenthpower

Oh there is more...

The guy published that our sun is actually a meteorite that asbestos isn't harmful and predicted that Austrailia would be freezing cold one year instead they had their hottest year on record.

Kinda loony IMO.

a reply to: Cobaltic1978

he hasn't exposed anything and it's not a hoax. It is a serious and complex issue with many causes. Some of the causes are man-made. Industry gets taxed and regulated when they exacerbate the problem. This is not too difficult to understand.

a reply to: Cobaltic1978

One scientist against his entire community says it's a hoax so it must be true? And I haven't even looked into his background and qualifications so I have no idea who he is but the majority of scientists say the Earth is in trouble because of man.

Why is that so hard to believe with the amount of population and destruction we bring to this world??!

Look to China for smog so thick you have to wear a mask to breathe or to Japan who pumped radioactive material into the ocean for how long, or is it still on going?

Two examples of many. We are destroying this Earth so it's hard for me to accept we aren't having any impact on the environment.

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: Cobaltic1978

he hasn't exposed anything and it's not a hoax. It is a serious and complex issue with many causes. Some of the causes are man-made. Industry gets taxed and regulated when they exacerbate the problem. This is not too difficult to understand.

Another good comparison is flooding at high tide.
There are now many who follow the thinking that climate change probably is cyclical in some respects (just as much of our climate is on an annual basis), but just as a storm swell is magnitudes of times more dangerous at high tide, natural climate changes are going to be magnitudes of times more dangerous when we have already taken our planet to a limit in terms of man-made change.

Without man-made climate change we might have experienced a period of changes, which we could more easily deal with. But with that man-made climate change too, we have created a far bigger problem that our natural environment is going to find it hard to deal with.

That's my take on this theory anyway. It seems to make sense to me, in a basic form.

Finally someone who makes sense...

Lots of naysayers, probably most Americans.

We've seen for fact, scientific community lie about temperatures, even by slightest.

There is a global agenda. That's obvious. There is profit, that's obvious.

I'm sure if one took the time to fact check what is being said , it could be verified.

But the fact still remains, the scientific community has lied about global temperatures and cheated graphs.

I have not watched the video or looked into this guy's background so I will not make a statement on his claims.

I do find it funny though how he is being discredited because he is making money on carbon industries such as coal, and Al gore is given a pass for getting rich off of his global warming claims.

Different sides of the same coin.

a reply to: Rocker2013

Oh, I'm not paranoid or afraid of my Government, I have a complete distrust, but then again, I no longer take what they have to say at face value.

All the science pointing to Man Made Global Warming has been funded by Governments throughout the world. The same Governments that make decisions regarding taxes relating to Carbon emissions, so you kind of contradict yourself. Don't listen to the guy who contradicts the science, he's out to make money. Listen to the Government funded scientists because they're producing the data that Governments use to make money,

a reply to: Cobaltic1978

The one nagging question that comes to mind every time I see all the brouhaha about climate change is this....Why do we continue to allow corporations to pollute and endanger the planet, our water sources, our agriculture, our air while the rest of us banter about whether it is happening or not. I don't trust world governments, their scientists or the corporations that buy them off. While we argue, the mess just gets worse. Carbon taxes are just another way of letting them continue to dump toxic waste onto and into the planet and then pass the cost of doing so onto us.

Clean things up by not supporting the polluters.